Rightdm00 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Without FFP Newcastle would have stripped us for parts the same way City did 15 years ago. For all of its flaws it's definitely better than what we had before. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 24 minutes ago, duke313 said: Leicester exist, yes? We’re currently sitting in 2nd despite FFP rules, with a good chance of finishing top 4.. But Leicester are the example of why FFP doesn't work! They won the league but they can't sustain it because the established clubs have such an advantage over them Same with us in 2nd, we haven't overtaken utd and Chelsea, they'll be back when they eventually sort their shit out 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 36 minutes ago, duke313 said: Leicester exist, yes? We’re currently sitting in 2nd despite FFP rules, with a good chance of finishing top 4.. Leicester was an outlier. Where are they now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 31 minutes ago, HeyAnty said: Leicester was an outlier. Where are they now? They still won the league, whilst remaining compliant to FFP. Man Utd, Liverpool and other revenue giants weren’t helped by FFP that season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 4 hours ago, duke313 said: The alternative is no FFP and Newcastle spending £6 billion on players with no restrictions. Two oil state runs clubs battling for titles, while the rest of us get into more and more debt trying to keep up. No, the alternative is something different to both of those options. It's not "FFP or nothing". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humanoid Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 3 hours ago, thabucks said: Sad part of FFP for me is that it incentivises the selling of homegrown academy players and from that POV it makes sense financially to sell Jacob Ramsey this summer to book pure profit. It shouldn't incentivise such sales. There ought to be FFP concessions for young players being developed from the academy up to the age of 24-25, depending on how many PL games they play. That would be a great way to incentivise homegrown talent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 14 minutes ago, Don_Simon said: No, the alternative is something different to both of those options. It's not "FFP or nothing". Go on then . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 15 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Go on then . . . Ooooh, I like a challenge. Given I have zero experience and expertise in this role, nor being paid any money to come up with solutions, I imagine my idea will fall short of your expectations. However, I'll give it a go: Teams compile their list of expenses for the season ahead and place the money in a holding account with the Premier League. Thus evidencing they have the requisite money to get through the season. If they can't do that, they are docked points at the start of the season. Done. I've fixed FFP and your sneaky challenge has been met. What a day. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 19 hours ago, Jareth said: Not sure if this thread is spilling into a wider FFP discussion - but FFP as the reason the 'big 6' are protected, is a moot point when Villa are 2nd in the league. Yea but how much do Sky really want that to be the case? They are desperate for it to get back to the top 6. When Liverpool won over the new year to go 3 points clear at the top, they refused to say who they were going clear of… they actually referred to Arsenal and City despite them being 3rd and 4th at the time. Look at the womens super league - who are the top 6 sides? Last season one of those was in the championship. Now the women’s game is reaching more fans and gaining more interest… How is it the top 6 for that league are now the better sides all of the sudden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 10 minutes ago, Don_Simon said: Ooooh, I like a challenge. Given I have zero experience and expertise in this role, nor being paid any money to come up with solutions, I imagine my idea will fall short of your expectations. However, I'll give it a go: Teams compile their list of expenses for the season ahead and place the money in a holding account with the Premier League. Thus evidencing they have the requisite money to get through the season. If they can't do that, they are docked points at the start of the season. Done. I've fixed FFP and your sneaky challenge has been met. What a day. Great answer! Not even sure what problem that's trying to solve. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 39 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Great answer! Appreciate the kind words! Have yourself a sweet weekend. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I was wondering whether owners could have the option of say paying in x amount of money to a central PL fund/bank, once it's cleared the club then gets it back to add as a form of revenue but pay something like a 10-20% tax on top which gets divided up amongst the rest of the clubs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 4 hours ago, thabucks said: Sad part of FFP for me is that it incentivises the selling of homegrown academy players and from that POV it makes sense financially to sell Jacob Ramsey this summer to book pure profit. On one hand the FA & UEFA want clubs to prioritise bringing players through for the first & national teams, but then selling these players aids the bottom line, meaning cheaper foreign based players being brought to replace them to balance the books on occasion. I guess whatever they do it will always be an imperfect system. Thank you @CVByrne for your recent posts and analysis btw, it’s v.helpful and much appreciated! I think Ramsey will be sacrificed at some stage aswell. Ultimately as good as he is and potentially could be he's barely figured up to December and hasn't been great since his return so he feels a little expendable to me given what we've built in central midfield in last 18 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 3 hours ago, villa4europe said: But Leicester are the example of why FFP doesn't work! They won the league but they can't sustain it because the established clubs have such an advantage over them Same with us in 2nd, we haven't overtaken utd and Chelsea, they'll be back when they eventually sort their shit out I can’t see how you have come to that conclusion. Leicester can’t compete with the rich clubs and it would be even more obvious if the rich clubs were not being held back by FFP as much as they are currently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) 15 minutes ago, LondonLax said: I can’t see how you have come to that conclusion. Leicester can’t compete with the rich clubs and it would be even more obvious if the rich clubs were not being held back by FFP as much as they are currently. No because at least 2 of those rich clubs, potentially 3 if not 4 with arsenal and Spurs, have owners who have no intention of giving their clubs their personal wealth Leicester were trying to stay above / level with teams with £400m+ revenues whilst theirs was £150-200m and rules that restricted spending based on revenue and we wonder why they couldn't do it? Edited January 13 by villa4europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rightdm00 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 22 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: I was wondering whether owners could have the option of say paying in x amount of money to a central PL fund/bank, once it's cleared the club then gets it back to add as a form of revenue but pay something like a 10-20% tax on top which gets divided up amongst the rest of the clubs. Sounds like a luxury tax which MLB and the NBA use. 20% wouldn't be enough though to stop nation states from buying titles. Would need be punishing once you got over a certain cap, say a 2 for 1 tax for every dollar an owner wants to spend over that cap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rightdm00 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) Leicester not winning another title may be FFP related but them getting relegated was completely due to their own mismanagement. For me, FFP has performed admirably. The league hasn't been this competitive, top to bottom, for 20 years. Teams like Brighton and Villa can keep its talent without having to bow to the financial might of the Chelsea/Man City types. It can definitely be improved upon but to think we should repeal and go back to the way it was before is madness. We would be a mid-table club with no chance of a top 4 finish within a season. Edited January 13 by Rightdm00 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 5 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said: Leicester not winning another title may be FFP related but them getting relegated was completely due to their own mismanagement. For me, FFP has performed admirably. The league hasn't been this competitive, top to bottom, for 20 years. Teams like Brighton and Villa can keep its without having to bow to the financial night of the Chelsea/Man City types. It can definitely be improved upon but to think we should repeal and go back to the way it was before is madness. We would be a mid-table club with no chance of a top 4 finish within a season. That's where I disagree I think without FFP there no guarantees as to what would happen but potentially the only club that would do anything totally different is Newcastle Man city and Chelsea already spunk billions on their squads I dont know for sure but I think potentially we have already, or could have owners that would out spend utd, Liverpool, spurs and arsenal What I definitley dont know is who would actually own us without FFP, if every billionaire and his dog would come for the PL and if FFP is actually scaring a lot of buyers off Again don't know for sure but I also think tickets would be cheaper, kits would be cheaper, the gambling companies would disappear and maybe they'd explore the TV options more making it both cheaper and more available The thing FFP has done is bring more money than ever in to the game and it's not for the better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 22 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said: The league hasn't been this competitive, top to bottom, for 20 years. Mad that people can't see this. Two of the clubs in England are owned by nation states, with essentially infinite resources. We don't have to look far in Europe to see leagues with teams who have massively greater resources than their competitors look like, and the answer is Germany or Spain or France. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 59 minutes ago, villa4europe said: No because at least 2 of those rich clubs, potentially 3 if not 4 with arsenal and Spurs, have owners who have no intention of giving their clubs their personal wealth Leicester were trying to stay above / level with teams with £400m+ revenues whilst theirs was £150-200m and rules that restricted spending based on revenue and we wonder why they couldn't do it? There is no indication Leicester’s owner was prepared to put in the extra £300m a season required to make up the difference if he had been allowed to. That’s without considering that it would most likely have been City or Chelsea throwing in another £300m on top, rather than Leicester had they been allowed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts